> I am not a DE of this particular registry, but Esko is, so he may > provide some insight into their setup. There's no formal definition anywhere that I'm aware of. The registry does use one "primary" expert and multiple "secondary" experts currently. This suggests that the primary expert is contacted first by IANA. In practice any one expert can make the decision without requiring consensus or discussion with other experts. For me ok to leave this all to 'DE / IANA self-organization'. Esko -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Fossati <thomas.fossati@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: maandag 10 maart 2025 16:33 To: Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: secdir@xxxxxxxx; core@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update-05 On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 16:05, Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sec 4.4 should clarify state explicitly if there is one DE, or > > multiple and what the quorum is. > > Is the DE team’s composition and consensus protocol usually explicitly > defined? My instinct is to let the DEs self-organise on such matters. > > In my experience (TLS registries and and NTP registry RFC), those are explicitly put in the doc so that the IESG can review and decide how many to pick. Shrug, if it works with your AD, then fine. Francesca's AD review didn't raise this as an issue, so I presume she's OK with the current state of affairs. I am not a DE of this particular registry, but Esko is, so he may provide some insight into their setup. > So overall, my concerns are addressed. Thanks again for your time & consideration. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
